a lot of controversial points raised by hoodbhoy and i was not happy by them but lets have an open discussion
after banglis left us in 1971, did two nation theory die as well? after all, islam failed to unite two Muslim communities as they were different in every other aspect meaning that a pakistani punjabi muslim would feel comfortable living side by side with a hindu or sikh punjabi vs living with a bangali muslim. **so is two-nation theory which was based on religion valid anymore?
**do we need two nation theory for our existence as a country anymore?
shd pakistan ignore killings of these fundamentalist muslim leaders as we do ignore such killings elsewhere?
How about Hindus, Christian, Parsi living in Pakistan? Whats their nation? If Hindu and Muslims are two different nations, then what is the nation of minorities living in India and Pakistan?
Why does condemning killings of JI leaders takes firm believe in two nation theory? Nobody is asking hoodbhoy to condemn it only because they are muslims.
Would have been better, if you read complete article before raising the question. Hoodbhai did said:
*As for the fairness of the judicial process in Bangladesh, Amnesty International and other leading human rights organisations had already raised serious concerns about the process under which war crimes are being handled. These include denying defence lawyers adequate time to prepare their cases, and arbitrarily limiting the number of witnesses they could call upon. But Pakistan can scarcely accuse Bangladesh of unfair trials because its own judicial system has even shakier legs.
*Two nations theory issue is relevant as thats what Jamat e Islami (both Pakistan and Bengladesh) are trying to justify the actions of Alshams o Albadr.
The last two para's of the article is all what is needed.
[QUOTE]
Looking to the future, for Bangladesh it is important not to be locked into the particularities of its birth circumstances. Hanging aging war criminals may bring satisfaction but cannot bring peace, stability and democracy. Instead, it is time to close a chapter filled with pain and sorrow, and then move on.
Pakistan needs to do far more than Bangladesh. As a starter, it must no longer allow young Pakistanis in schools to be filled with wildly distorted versions of history. These ignore the horrors West Pakistan inflicted upon the Bengalis. Rather than defend war criminals or deny what happened in 1971, Pakistan should seek to normalise relations with Bangladesh. Truth and reconciliation is what is needed.
[/QUOTE]
Why does condemning killings of JI leaders takes firm believe in two nation theory? Nobody is asking hoodbhoy to condemn it only because they are muslims.
there is a direct connection as explained by hoodbhoy below ...
***Irrespective of what these militia leaders may have actually done in 1971, Pakistan’s establishment feels it must stand by them because of its ideological fixation on the two-nation theory.
***The two-nation theory — as I was taught in school — was, of course, critical to creating Pakistan. Let us look at its two key premises: First, that Muslims and Hindus are fundamentally incompatible and must therefore live apart from each other with Pakistan as the homeland for Muslims. Second, that Muslims form a single nation — the ummah — one that is robust enough to withstand local variations of sect, language, culture, and tribe
pakistni army and its leadership do not care at all even if its own citizens are killed anywhere in the world but they are concerned about Bangali mullahs being killed in Bangladesh by hasina wajid only because othose mullas fought along with pak army to protect two-nation concept in 1971..
and pakistani establishment still believes that 2 nation theory is critical to survival of pakistan
and hoodbhoy is saying that forget 2 nation theory. it is failed and we dont need for our survival in today's world
Why does condemning killings of JI leaders takes firm believe in two nation theory? Nobody is asking hoodbhoy to condemn it only because they are muslims.
not fair ajaz bhai...looks like you didnt even read the article fully
I am disappointed in hoodbhouy, PD and muqawwee. Get above your prejudices when judging a matter for Gods sake.
1- For Hoodbhouy to question the fairness of judicial process and then call the hanged people "war criminals" is hypocritical.
2- You don't have to bring a sham trial to write about your convictions, that's a shaky ground to start.
3- And what has two nation theory got to do with a sham trial.
4- Those people who sided with Pakiatan in 1971 cannot and should not be hanged for their beliefs, as long as there is no evidence that they committed a crime.
And what has it got to do with Pakistani establishment, why can't Hoodbhouy himself like a conscientious person condemn a trial which was had severe short comings, like many international bodies did. And what is wrong of Pakistan said what many impartial people said as well.
That's like some white people telling blacks not to object on police shootings since more blacks are shot by other black people, that's absurd. You cannot stop someone in pointing out a problem just bcoz he/she is not perfect himself.
pakistni army and its leadership do not care at all even if its own citizens are killed anywhere in the world but they are concerned about Bangali mullahs being killed in Bangladesh by hasina wajid only because othose mullas fought along with pak army to protect two-nation concept in 1971..
and pakistani establishment still believes that 2 nation theory is critical to survival of pakistan
and hoodbhoy is saying that forget 2 nation theory. it is failed and we dont need for our survival in today's world
Ok, any example where pakistan has shown carelessness when the citizens were being killed in other part of the world? Remember turky coup, tajikistsan/kasakistan blasts?
And dont tell me that our govt has taken a serous stance against these killings.
instead, hoodbhoy wants govt remain dead silent because they are mullah.
Its unrealistic to ask what would be your response if Bangladesh was hanging someone from a minority of Pakistan.
I am disappointed in hoodbhouy, PD and muqawwee. Get above your prejudices when judging a matter for Gods sake.
1- For Hoodbhouy to question the fairness of judicial process and then call the hanged people "war criminals" is hypocritical.
2- You don't have to bring a sham trial to write about your convictions, that's a shaky ground to start.
3- And what has two nation theory got to do with a sham trial.
4- Those people who sided with Pakiatan in 1971 cannot and should not be hanged for their beliefs, as long as there is no evidence that they committed a crime.
I think he concluded it very well and as we dislike when India interferes in Balochistan matter, Pakistan should now stop interfering in Bengladesh's internal matter. JI Pakistan is still playing double game with Pakistani masses by keeping alive the matter and bringing it into lime light through rallies.
Why this hypocrite JI kept mum, when Balochistan was under insurgency? Have you ever heard them condemning Hazara killings? When there was operation against Sindhis after Bhutto's hanging, these were celebrating their honeymoon with Zia. Saare jahan ka gham hai inn munafiqon ko, Paksitanaiyo ka nahin.
Ok, any example where pakistan has shown carelessness when the citizens were being killed in other part of the world? Remember turky coup, tajikistsan/kasakistan blasts?
And dont tell me that our govt has taken a serous stance against these killings.
instead, hoodbhoy wants govt remain dead silent because they are mullah.
Its unrealistic to ask what would be your response if Bangladesh was hanging someone from a minority of Pakistan.
First read the whole article. examples are there. Execution of Pakistanis by Saudi Kangaroo Courts, where Pakistan government opt to be silent for convenience purposes.
You only got one tool to save your party for being questioned due to its past actions. Bring a minority execution and see the action of those who are talking against pak saaf JI.
BTW, PD and me didn't bring JI in this thread. PD just started a debate, whether 2 nations theory is still required for Pakistan's survival now? He himself shown his dissatisfaction with Hoodbhoy on the matters he discussed in the article, but still........
Bengali started killing people belonging to West Pakistan when they saw that the then dictator would not allow them the government even after winning heavy mandate. Though the killings were not that much because a very little population mostly government servants or students live in former East Pakistan just before military took over in March 1971. Bihari living in former East Pakistan should have understood that they had to live with the majority but these fools a racist minority, sided with the defeated army. Army was involved in genocide, mass graves, rapes, robbing their own banks ultimately surrendered. Biharis were themselves responsible for their fate, they should have sided with Bengali rather than killers. “samandar main reh kar magarmach se ber nahin karte”
The division of India in 1947 was quite unnatural. The two factions of new country were 1000 miles apart with sea in between them. The culture, the language every thing was different than West Pakistan. The breakup was a normal phenomena because West Pakistanis refused to accept Bengali as their equal and vice versa was also the bitter truth. West Pakistanis hated as much East Pakistanis hated them. Founder should have thought this millions times well before signing pact with the British rulers.
And how can I forget the diatribes of AH. sala murderer yeh karhwi baat bilkul such bol gaya.
I think he concluded it very well and as we dislike when India interferes in Balochistan matter, Pakistan should now stop interfering in Bengladesh's internal matter. JI Pakistan is still playing double game with Pakistani masses by keeping alive the matter and bringing it into lime light through rallies.
Why this hypocrite JI kept mum, when Balochistan was under insurgency? Have you ever heard them condemning Hazara killings? When there was operation against Sindhis after Bhutto's hanging, these were celebrating their honeymoon with Zia. Saare jahan ka gham hai inn munafiqon ko, Paksitanaiyo ka nahin.
First it was about Pakistani establishment and now it's about JI. You keep shifting the goal posts. It's not Bagladesh municipal election nor territorial dispute. If international bodies can raise concerns about it so can Pakistan.
there is a direct connection as explained by hoodbhoy below ...
***Irrespective of what these militia leaders may have actually done in 1971, Pakistan’s establishment feels it must stand by them because of its ideological fixation on the two-nation theory.
***The two-nation theory — as I was taught in school — was, of course, critical to creating Pakistan. Let us look at its two key premises: First, that Muslims and Hindus are fundamentally incompatible and must therefore live apart from each other with Pakistan as the homeland for Muslims. Second, that Muslims form a single nation — the ummah — one that is robust enough to withstand local variations of sect, language, culture, and tribe
I don't believe in 2 nation theory, and I don't believe in the alternative presented at that time either, that all people living in I dis are one nation and hence should live under one state.
I would recommend Hoodbhouy and rest of you to read this book by HM Sirvai "India Divided: Legend and Reality".
Muslim League till 1946 was ready to negotiate a deal with congress for United India in return for constitutional gaurantees for Muslims like quota in jobs and limited autonomy for
Provinces.
First it was about Pakistani establishment and now it's about JI. You keep shifting the goal posts. It's not Bagladesh municipal election nor territorial dispute. If international bodies can raise concerns about it so can Pakistan.
JI has been part of the establishment and the narrative on various issues. On hanging issues and history behind such hangings, both JI and Pakistani establishment are partner in crime. You see the link.
Again before condemning Bangladesh's unfair trials, why not we first accept wrongdoings from our side?
I don't believe in 2 nation theory, and I don't believe in the alternative presented at that time either, that all people living in I dis are one nation and hence should live under one state.
I would recommend Hoodbhouy and rest of you to read this book by HM Sirvai "India Divided: Legend and Reality".
Muslim League till 1946 was ready to negotiate a deal with congress for United India in return for constitutional gaurantees for Muslims like quota in jobs and limited autonomy for
Provinces.
So in other words, it was all about economic disparity (or fear of it), which lead to division / demand for division. Then where came the division based on religion. Its very tricky situation to determine nation / nationality, when both countries inherited sizable minorities on the eve of independence.
As you mentioned you don't like 2 nations theory (you have got the reason for dislike. May be practical aspects or how it was misused after independence. Many Muslim writers from India state that they were cheated by Mr Jinah to put them in more critical condition. Molana Azad's speech at Jama Masjid Delhi just after partition represents such sentiments of being cheated. You may refer to Rafiq Zakaria's book 'The man who divided India', though I found him biased at some places of the book.
